IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v30y2021i3p230-240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evidence-Based Checklist for Improving Scoping Review Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Cooper
  • Robyn Cant
  • Michelle Kelly
  • Tracy Levett-Jones
  • Lisa McKenna
  • Philippa Seaton
  • Fiona Bogossian

Abstract

A scoping review aims to systematically explore and map the research available from a wide range of sources. The objective of this study was to produce a scoping review checklist to guide future scoping studies to enable rigorous review and critique of phenomena of interest. The methods used included a review of literature, expert consensus group meetings, a modified Delphi survey and, finally, verification against recent scoping study examples. Results showed that the checklist was able to identify key elements of scoping reviews. The 22-item Scoping Review Checklist (SRC), which includes two optional stakeholder consultation items, has been developed using rigorous recommended approaches. The checklist can be used to guide the conduct and critique of scoping studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Cooper & Robyn Cant & Michelle Kelly & Tracy Levett-Jones & Lisa McKenna & Philippa Seaton & Fiona Bogossian, 2021. "An Evidence-Based Checklist for Improving Scoping Review Quality," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 30(3), pages 230-240, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:30:y:2021:i:3:p:230-240
    DOI: 10.1177/1054773819846024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1054773819846024
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1054773819846024?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:30:y:2021:i:3:p:230-240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.